Section 1 of 9
Start Here

The Foundation

Core concepts that underpin every conversation you'll have at Point Predictive. Get these right and everything else makes sense.

Company Overview
Lending Landscape
What Makes PP Different
1P vs. 3P Fraud
Fraud in Credit Losses
The Consortium
Terminology

Company Overview

Who Point Predictive is, where the company came from, and why it exists. Understand this before anything else.

01
The Company
What Point Predictive Does

Point Predictive is a leading provider of artificial intelligence-driven fraud prevention, risk intelligence, and verification solutions focused primarily on the consumer lending and automotive finance industries. The company helps banks, credit unions, captives, fintechs, and specialty lenders reduce fraud losses, improve underwriting efficiency, and safely grow loan originations.

What differentiates Point Predictive in the market is its consortium-based intelligence network and real-time application visibility across lenders, dealers, and finance sources. By analyzing patterns across a broad ecosystem of lending activity, Point Predictive can identify fraud risks and emerging attack patterns that individual institutions or traditional tools often cannot detect on their own.

The company's solutions are designed not only to stop fraud, but also to enable "safe growth" — helping lenders approve more legitimate borrowers while reducing losses tied to synthetic identity fraud, straw borrowers, credit washing-enabled bust-out fraud, dealer manipulation, and organized fraud rings.

02
The History
Why Point Predictive Was Built

Point Predictive was founded to address a growing problem in consumer lending: traditional fraud and credit risk tools were no longer sufficient to detect sophisticated, organized fraud attacks occurring across multiple lenders and channels.

As digital lending expanded and indirect auto finance became increasingly automated, fraudsters began exploiting gaps between lenders, dealers, and verification systems. Existing tools largely relied on static or backward-looking data such as credit bureau files, identity databases, and institution-specific historical performance. These approaches often failed to identify coordinated fraud behavior occurring in real time across the broader market.

Point Predictive was created to solve this challenge through advanced machine learning, artificial intelligence, and consortium data sharing. By aggregating and analyzing application activity across a large network of lenders and dealerships, the company developed the ability to detect hidden fraud patterns, suspicious application velocity, identity inconsistencies, and organized fraud networks much earlier in the lending lifecycle.

Over time, the company expanded its capabilities beyond application fraud detection into areas such as:

  • Income and employment validation
  • Dealer risk intelligence
  • Synthetic identity detection
  • Bust-out fraud identification
  • Fraud consortium analytics
  • Real-time risk scoring and alerting
  • Safe Loan Origination and Growth

Today, Point Predictive supports hundreds of financial institutions across the United States, including banks, credit unions, captive finance companies, fintech lenders, and automotive lenders.

03
The Mission
What Point Predictive Is Here to Do

Point Predictive's mission is to help lenders make safer, smarter, and faster lending decisions through the power of artificial intelligence, consortium intelligence, and real-time risk visibility.

The company aims to:

  • Reduce fraud and credit losses
  • Increase safe loan approvals
  • Improve operational efficiency
  • Help lenders identify risk earlier in the lifecycle
  • Provide visibility beyond a lender's own internal data

A core philosophy behind Point Predictive's approach is that fraud today is highly coordinated and increasingly cross-institutional. Because individual lenders can only see their own applications and customer behavior, many sophisticated fraud patterns remain invisible when viewed in isolation.

Point Predictive's consortium model helps solve this problem by enabling broader market intelligence and pattern recognition across lenders and dealers in real time.

"The company's broader vision is to transform lending from reactive fraud detection to proactive risk intelligence — helping financial institutions safely grow while protecting both lenders and consumers from increasingly sophisticated fraud threats."

04
The Culture
Company Core Values

These three values define how Point Predictive operates and what's expected of everyone on the team. They're not aspirational — they're the standard.

01 — Be The Expert

This doesn't mean you need to be an expert today, but we're looking for hungry people who constantly want to learn about our data, our products, and our market. This isn't a place where your hand will be held, and you're expected to take initiative.

02 — Pitch-In

Be an owner, even if it's not your job to do so. At Point Predictive you'll most likely be pulled into Sales, Marketing, Customer Success, and maybe even a little Data Science. We don't shy away from uncomfortable and like to get our hands dirty. Always treat deliverables with urgency and don't procrastinate. Startups will eat people alive who wait until the last minute.

03 — Get It Done

Frank and Tim like to say "Get it done, done." We want to think about a project being complete from the eyes of the customer or end user, not at the end of our job description. We are a team here, and so everyone is willing to go the extra mile to ensure a project is complete and has a standard of excellence. Don't be afraid of confrontation and hold others to a higher standard of urgency and quality.

The Lending Landscape

A crash course in how lending actually works — understand the ecosystem before you sell into it.

01
Lending Basics
Direct vs. Indirect Lending
Direct Lending

Lender → Borrower

The borrower applies directly to the lender — walking into a bank or credit union branch, applying online, or calling in. The lender owns the full relationship from application through payoff.

Indirect Lending

Lender → Dealer → Borrower

The borrower applies at a dealership. The dealer submits the application to one or more lenders on the borrower's behalf. The lender never meets the borrower — this is the dominant model in auto finance.

Why This Matters

Most of Point Predictive's market operates in indirect auto lending. The dealer sits between the lender and borrower, which creates a visibility gap — and a fraud opportunity. Dealers can manipulate applications in ways a direct lender would catch far more easily.

02
The Scoreboard
Metrics Every Lender Watches

These are the numbers your prospects live and die by. Learn them — they're your entry points into every discovery conversation.

Approval Rate
% of applications approved. Too low = growth problem. Too high = risk problem.
Funding Rate
% of approvals that actually fund. A gap here signals friction or dealer issues.
Charge-offs
Loans written off as uncollectable losses. The primary measure of portfolio damage.
Delinquencies
Loans past due. A leading indicator of future charge-offs.
The Opener

"Where are you seeing unexpected losses?" is often the best first question. Charge-off spikes and delinquency trends are trigger events — they create urgency in a way that cold outreach rarely does.

03
The Players
The Auto Lending Ecosystem

Auto lending involves four distinct groups. Know who each one is and how they interact — your prospects fall into the lender category, but you'll often hear about the others in every conversation.

Lenders
Who You Sell To

Banks, credit unions, captive finance companies (e.g., Toyota Financial), fintechs, and specialty lenders. They fund loans, take on credit risk, and absorb fraud losses. They are your buyers.

Dealers
The Middleman

Automotive dealerships originate the majority of auto loan applications. They submit applications to lenders through platforms like DealerTrack and RouteOne. Some dealers are bad actors — falsifying income, inflating values, or colluding with borrowers.

Borrowers
The Applicant

The individual applying for the loan. Most are legitimate — but a meaningful percentage misrepresent their income, employment, or identity. First-party fraud (the borrower lying) is far more common than most lenders realize.

LOS Platforms
The Infrastructure

Loan Origination Systems are the software lenders use to receive, process, and decision applications. MeridianLink, Sync1, DeFi Solutions, and Origence are common examples. Point Predictive integrates directly into these platforms — knowing a prospect's LOS is a key qualification question.

04
The Journey
How a Loan Goes from Application to Loss

Understanding the loan lifecycle tells you where fraud enters and when it shows up as a loss. These are two very different moments.

Application
Fraud enters here
Decision
Underwriting
Funding
Servicing
Charge-off
Loss shows up here

"Fraud occurs at application — but losses show up months later. By the time a lender sees the loss, the fraudster is long gone."

The core timing problem Point Predictive solves

This timing gap is why most lenders underestimate their fraud exposure. They see the loss in their charge-off report and call it a credit problem. They never connect it back to a fraudulent application that slipped through months earlier.

05
The Economics
How Lenders Make Money — and Lose It
The Hidden Problem

Fraud losses are routinely miscategorized as credit losses because most lenders never identify the fraud that caused the default. This means the true cost of fraud is almost always understated — and lenders are often spending money solving the wrong problem.

06
The Decision
How Lenders Decide Who Gets Approved

Every loan decision involves some combination of automated and manual underwriting. Understanding this helps you identify where inefficiency — and fraud exposure — lives in a prospect's process.

Automated Decisioning

Rules + Scores

Credit scores (FICO), bureau data, debt-to-income ratios, and policy rules run automatically inside the LOS. Fast and consistent, but only as good as the data it's fed — and easily gamed by borrowers who know the thresholds.

Manual Underwriting

Human Review

An underwriter manually reviews income documents, pay stubs, and employment records for loans that don't auto-approve. Time-consuming, inconsistent, and still vulnerable to fabricated documents. IEValidate automates this layer.

07
The Gap
Where Traditional Tools Fall Short

Most lenders already have fraud and risk tools in place. The problem isn't that they have nothing — it's that what they have was built for a different era of fraud.

FICO & Credit Scores

Measures creditworthiness — the likelihood a borrower will repay based on past behavior. It says nothing about whether the application information is truthful or whether the borrower is part of a fraud network.

LexisNexis / Identity Tools

Verifies that the person applying is who they say they are. Excellent at catching third-party identity theft — but completely blind to first-party fraud, where the real person applies and simply lies about their income or employer.

Internal Models

Built on a single lender's historical data — which means they can only detect fraud patterns that have already occurred at that institution. Organized fraud rings specifically target multiple lenders simultaneously to stay under each one's radar.

"Any tool that only sees your data can only find your fraud. The patterns that span multiple lenders are invisible to everyone — except a consortium."

The gap Point Predictive fills
08
The Threat
The Fraud Landscape

Fraud in auto lending isn't a single problem — it's a collection of distinct attack types, each requiring different detection approaches. Know these before your first discovery call.

Synthetic Identity Fraud

A fraudster builds a fake identity using a mix of real and fabricated information — often a real SSN (frequently a child's) combined with a fabricated name and address. The synthetic identity builds credit over time before being used to take out loans with no intention of repayment.

Straw Borrowers

A person with good credit applies for a loan on behalf of someone who couldn't qualify — often for compensation. The straw borrower has no intention of making payments. This is particularly common in dealer-assisted fraud schemes.

Credit Washing → Bust-Out Fraud

Fraudsters dispute accurate negative items on their credit report (a process called "credit washing") to artificially inflate their score, then apply for multiple loans across multiple lenders simultaneously and default on all of them. Point Predictive can identify this pattern before funding.

Dealer Fraud

Dealers manipulate applications by falsifying income documents, inflating vehicle values, fabricating employment, or colluding with borrowers. Some dealers operate as organized fraud rings, routing fraudulent applications across multiple lenders. DealerCheck is designed to surface these patterns.

Connecting It Back

Every one of these fraud types is most effectively detected using cross-lender, real-time data. A single lender's internal view catches some of it — but coordinated attacks are designed specifically to stay under any one lender's threshold. That's the problem Point Predictive was built to solve.

What Makes Point Predictive Different

Four things no competitor can replicate. Know these before your first prospect call.

01
The Approach
We Solved the Problem Nobody Else Was Looking For

For years, the lending industry focused almost exclusively on identity fraud -- the fraud they could see, tag, and report. Point Predictive went a different direction. We focused on early payment default as the primary signal, not confirmed fraud tags. That was against the grain at the time.

Most fraud never gets tagged as fraud. A borrower lies about their income, the loan funds, and three months later it defaults. The lender calls it a credit loss and moves on. The fraud is invisible -- but EPD is the footprint it leaves behind.

How to Say It

"Most fraud tools wait for lenders to identify fraud and then learn from those tags. We built our models around early payment default -- because that's where the fraud actually shows up, whether or not anyone called it fraud."

02
The Data
The Largest Loan Fraud Consortium in the Country

Point Predictive has spent a decade building the largest lending fraud consortium in the country. 650+ financial institutions contribute application data every month, creating a pool of intelligence that now covers 307 million scored applications and over 90 billion unique data points.

This isn't something a competitor can replicate by hiring engineers or raising capital. It took years of trust-building with lenders, years of data accumulation, and years of fraud tagging to get here. The consortium is the moat. No other vendor is close.

How to Say It

"Our competitors can build a model. They can't build a decade of consortium data. That's not a technology gap -- it's a time gap. And it only grows."

03
The Technology
Deep Learning + An Army of Fraud Agents

Most competitors build custom machine learning models for each lender. These models are overfit to that lender's historical data, need constant maintenance, and struggle to adapt when fraud patterns shift.

Point Predictive uses a deep learning LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) approach with common models trained across the entire consortium. Every lender benefits from intelligence that spans the whole network, not just their own history.

Beyond the models, Point Predictive has built an Army of Fraud Agents -- AI agents each trained to identify a very specific type of fraud. These agents comb through the millions of applications processed each month, surfacing emerging trends in a fraction of the time it would take a human team. They operate 24/7.

How to Say It

"A custom model trained on your data is only as good as your fraud history. Our common model is trained on the entire industry's fraud history. There's no comparison."

04
The Expertise
Fraud Investigators as an Extension of Your Team

Point Predictive was built by fraud experts, not data scientists who later added fraud as a feature. The company has a team of seasoned fraud investigators who review applications daily -- and they operate as an extension of every customer's fraud team.

When a new fraud trend is identified, it gets fed directly to the data science team so the trend can be captured in the models in real time. The human expertise and the technology operate as a closed loop -- each making the other sharper.

How to Say It

"When you work with Point Predictive, you're not just buying a score. You're getting a fraud team that monitors the entire lending ecosystem on your behalf, every single day."

"Any vendor can sell you a model. Point Predictive brings the data, the technology, the expertise, and the approach that was built to find fraud that most lenders don't even know they have."

How to tie all four together

First-Party vs. Third-Party Fraud

The most important distinction in this job -- and the one new sellers get wrong most often.

Third-Party Fraud

The Impersonator

Someone steals another person's identity to take out a loan. The victim has no idea. The fraudster is a criminal pretending to be someone else. This is what most people picture when they hear "fraud."

First-Party Fraud

The Liar

The real person applies -- but lies on the application. Identity checks out. But they fabricated income, used a fake employer, or never intended to repay. It funds, then it defaults.

The industry spends almost all of its time and money solving third-party fraud. LexisNexis, SentiLink, Experian -- excellent identity tools, table stakes at this point. But according to Point Predictive's 2026 data, 69% of auto lending fraud exposure is first-party fraud. Income and employment misrepresentation alone accounts for 45% of total exposure -- $4.68B annually.

Most lenders don't know this. They think they have a fraud problem if someone steals a customer's identity. They don't realize the bigger problem is sitting in their credit loss bucket.

"Most fraud tools verify who someone is. Point Predictive verifies what they're telling you is true."

The line you'll use constantly
Why Prospects Underestimate This

Most lenders focus on the fraud they can see and catch. First-party fraud is invisible until a loan defaults -- and by then it's been miscategorized as a credit loss. Your job is to show them what they can't see.

How Fraud Hides in Credit Losses

This is the insight that opens doors. Almost every prospect will think their fraud problem is smaller than it is.

When a borrower lies about their income, gets approved, and stops paying within the first 3-6 months, what does that lender call it? A credit loss. A bad loan. Maybe a charge-off. It goes into the credit loss bucket, and nobody looks at it again. The fraud that caused it is invisible.

This is the Early Payment Default (EPD) problem. Point Predictive defines EPD as a loan that stops paying within the first six months -- and our data shows that 70% of early payment defaults contain evidence of fraud or material misrepresentation on the original application. The loss wasn't a credit mistake. It was a fraud that got miscategorized.

70%
of Early Payment Defaults contain fraudThese losses are miscategorized as credit losses, making them nearly impossible to identify and prevent without consortium intelligence.

Why Prospects Say "We Don't Have a Fraud Problem"

When a prospect says this, they're almost always looking at the wrong number. They're looking at confirmed, caught fraud -- not what's buried in their charge-off data. EPD risk has more than doubled since 2017 and grew over 10% in 2024 alone.

The Data Study -- Your Door Opener

The offer that unlocks this conversation is the data study. Point Predictive will analyze a lender's portfolio and show them their actual fraud exposure. This is low-risk and no-obligation -- you're not asking them to buy anything. You're asking them if they want to know the truth about their losses.

"Your fraud losses aren't low -- they're just hiding in your credit loss bucket. We can show you exactly where."

How to reframe the "we don't have a fraud problem" objection

The Consortium

The single biggest reason Point Predictive's models outperform anything a lender could build themselves.

650+
Member Institutions
307M
Scored Applications
90B+
Unique Data Points
16K+
Fake Employers ID'd
$5T+
Loan Value Protected

What It Is

650+ financial institutions -- banks, credit unions, auto lenders, fintechs -- all submitting application data to a shared pool. Point Predictive analyzes that data, identifies fraud patterns across all of it, and feeds those signals back into the models every lender uses when they run a score.

Why It Matters

Fraud is invisible in isolation. A lender might see one application from a borrower -- no red flags on its own. But the consortium sees all 8 applications that same borrower submitted across 4 different dealerships in the same week. That cross-lender pattern becomes a high-confidence fraud signal. No single institution can build that alone.

"Fraud rings count on lenders not talking to each other. Our consortium is how lenders talk to each other without sharing anything they shouldn't."

How to explain consortium value simply

What's Shared -- and What Isn't

Security Credential to Know

Point Predictive is SOC 2 Type II certified and has never had a security incident. Security is the #1 deal blocker -- get ahead of it early.

Terminology

Terms that will come up constantly -- in prospect conversations, internal discussions, and demos. Click any term to expand.

Applications Core

The total number of loan requests a lender receives -- the top of the funnel. Every downstream metric flows from this number, so it's usually the first thing you establish when sizing a prospect's business.

In Discovery: "How many applications are you receiving monthly -- and what channels are those coming through?"
Approvals Core

The number of applications that pass a lender's credit policy and receive a credit decision. Approvals don't mean funded loans -- they just mean the lender said yes.

Funded Core

The number of approved loans that actually close and get funded. This is the number that drives revenue. The gap between approvals and funded loans is where friction, stipulations, and competitive loss all show up.

Approval Rate Core

Approvals divided by total applications. A first look at how conservative or aggressive a lender's credit policy is.

Sales Note: Point Predictive can help lenders confidently approve more of the right applications by clearing low-risk borrowers faster -- improving approval rate without increasing risk.
Capture Rate Core

Funded loans divided by approvals. Tells you how well a lender converts approved deals into actual business. A low capture rate usually means deals are being lost before funding -- most often due to friction, slow response times, or stipulation overload.

In a Conversation

"If you're approving 1,000 applications a month but only funding 400, that's 600 deals you said yes to and still lost. How much of that is stipulations slowing you down?"

Key Insight: Reducing stipulations through consortium intelligence directly improves capture rate -- lenders win more of the deals they already approved.
Look-to-Book Rate Core

Funded loans divided by total applications. The most complete picture of how effective a lender is overall -- from application all the way through to a closed loan.

Indirect Lending Auto

When applications come to a lender through a dealer rather than directly from the borrower. The dealer generates the application and shops it to multiple lenders simultaneously -- the lender originates the loan once it's funded. This creates intense competition. The lender who responds fastest with the least friction usually wins the deal.

In a Conversation

"In indirect lending, you don't just compete on rate. You compete on speed and simplicity. A dealer will take a slightly worse rate from a lender who doesn't bury them in stip requests."

Sales Note: Every stipulation is a chance for a dealer to send the deal somewhere else. Consortium intelligence lets lenders clear more applications without stips.
Adverse Selection Auto

When a lender consistently receives the deals that everyone else already passed on. Dealers prioritize their primary lending partners -- those lenders get first-look at the best applications. Secondary and tertiary lenders see what's left.

How to Spot It

"If your EPD rate is significantly higher than the consortium average for similar dealers, that's often adverse selection at work."

EPD (Early Payment Default) Core

A loan that stops making payments within the first 3-6 months of origination. Strongly correlated with application fraud. 70% of EPDs contain evidence of fraud or misrepresentation -- but lenders categorize them as credit losses, making the fraud invisible.

In a Conversation

"What's your current early payment default rate? And how are you currently categorizing those -- as fraud or credit losses?"

Straw Borrower Auto

When someone applies for a loan on behalf of another person who can't qualify themselves. The real borrower intends to use the vehicle; the straw borrower is just the name on the application.

Real Example

"A lender receives a single borrower application -- no obvious red flags. But Point Predictive saw that same borrower apply 30 minutes ago with a co-borrower at a different dealer and get declined. The co-borrower didn't disappear -- they're the one the car is actually for. That's a straw purchase."

Synthetic Identity Core

A fabricated identity built by combining a real SSN with a false name and address. The identity gets established slowly, builds credit, then gets used to take out loans with no intent to repay.

Sales Note: Point Predictive maintains the largest negative file of known synthetics in lending, flagging them daily for consortium members.
Bust-Out Fraud Core

An organized scheme where a borrower or fraud ring builds credit relationships with multiple lenders simultaneously, then maxes everything out at once and disappears. Up 83% since 2021. Cross-lender by nature -- almost impossible to catch without consortium data.

Credit Washing Core

When a borrower disputes accurate negative information on their credit report to artificially improve their score before applying for a loan. The disputes are fraudulent but the process appears legal, which makes it hard to catch.

Powerbooking Auto

When a dealer inflates the listed price or features of a vehicle to secure a larger loan than the car warrants. Dealers with high powerbooking activity have EPD rates of 8% vs. 2% for clean dealers.

Stipulations Core

Conditions a lender places on a loan before funding it. A high stipulation rate slows down the loan process and creates friction. Point Predictive reduces stips by using consortium intelligence to automatically clear applicants who don't need manual review.

Sales Note: Lenders often think of stip reduction as an ops problem. Point Predictive solves both ops efficiency and fraud detection simultaneously.
Hit Rate Core

The percentage of applications that score positively in a verification system. For IEValidate, it refers to what percentage of applicants can be verified without additional documentation. Higher hit rate = less friction = better borrower experience.

TWN (The Work Number) Core

Equifax's employment and income verification database. Primary competitor to IEValidate. Covers roughly 30-40% of borrowers. Charges $10-$20+ per verification. Has no fraud detection capability.

Sales Note: TWN's QuickBooks integration introduced fake employers into their system. IEValidate covers 100% of applicants and detects misrepresentation -- TWN does neither.
FCRA / GLBA Regulatory

The Fair Credit Reporting Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act -- the two primary regulatory frameworks governing how consumer financial data can be used. Point Predictive's FCRA-compliant model allows scores to be used in adverse action decisions. Many competitors' models aren't FCRA-compliant.

Competitive Edge: Zest AI's fraud model is not FCRA-compliant. AutoPass can be used for adverse action -- a real operational advantage.
Section 2

Products

Four products, two audiences. Know which one to lead with and why before your first discovery call.

Sold to Lenders
AutoPass
Full-spectrum fraud detection for consumer lending
40-60%
Fraud Reduction
80%
Auto-Decision
The Problem It Solves

Most fraud tools only catch identity fraud -- about 15-18% of actual exposure. AutoPass catches the other 80%: income misrepresentation, fake employers, straw borrowers, synthetic IDs, credit washing, and dealer fraud. All in a single score at application.

Fraud Types Detected
  • Income and employment misrepresentation
  • Synthetic identity fraud
  • Straw borrower schemes
  • Dealer-perpetrated fraud and powerbooking
  • Credit washing and collateral misrepresentation
  • True name identity theft
FCRA vs. GLBA -- Know the Difference
FCRA Version

Allows adverse action -- lenders can decline based solely on the AutoPass score. Highest-value version.

GLBA Version

Used to trigger or suppress stipulations. Cannot be the sole basis for a decline decision.

"You already verify who they are. AutoPass verifies whether what they're telling you is true -- income, employer, intent. That's the 80% of fraud your current tools are missing."

How to position against identity tools
Pairs WithIEValidateDealerCheckIEValidate deepens income signals; DealerCheck adds dealer-level monitoring.
Sold to Lenders
IEValidate
Income and employment verification with built-in fraud detection
60-70%
Stip Waived
100%
App Coverage
Two Components, One API Call

Observed Income: Real-time income read from the consortium using SSN only. FCRA-compliant for adverse action via One Score CRA.

Modeled Income: AI misrepresentation score. Benchmarks stated income against 350M+ reports using 40+ variables including employer, occupation, region, age, and tenure.

vs. The Work Number
  • TWN covers 30-40%; IEValidate covers 100%
  • TWN charges $10-20+ per hit; IEValidate costs a fraction of that
  • TWN verifies employment exists; IEValidate detects misrepresentation
  • TWN's QuickBooks integration introduced fake employers
  • Position as a replacement, not an add-on
How Lenders Use It

Run IEValidate on every application at underwriting. For 60-70% of approvals, confidence is high enough to waive the paystub stipulation entirely. For flagged files, route for manual review or request documentation only from the high-risk segment. Result: fewer stips, faster funding, better capture rate.

"TWN tells you someone works at a company. IEValidate tells you whether the income they claimed actually makes sense -- and flags the 10% who are lying."

IEValidate vs. The Work Number
Pairs WithAutoPassStrongest signal when combined with AutoPass's full fraud score. Can also be sold standalone as a TWN replacement.
Sold to Lenders
DealerCheck
Portfolio-level dealer monitoring that surfaces risky dealers before losses accumulate
8%
EPD (Risky)
2%
EPD (Clean)
The Problem It Solves

A single problematic dealer can generate millions in losses through powerbooking, straw purchases, or coordinated fraud. Most lenders don't have visibility into how their dealer performance compares to the market.

What It Identifies
  • Dealers with elevated EPD rates vs. consortium benchmarks
  • Powerbooking and collateral inflation patterns
  • Adverse selection signals (you're getting their worst paper)
  • Straw borrower activity tied to specific dealers
  • Dealers with known fraud ring activity
Your Score vs. The Consortium Score

DealerCheck shows a lender's own dealer score alongside the consortium dealer score. When a dealer looks fine in your data but is flagged across the broader network, that gap is often an adverse selection warning -- you're getting applications that other lenders already declined.

"You're not just approving borrowers -- you're trusting dealers to send you good paper. DealerCheck tells you which dealers have been earning that trust, and which haven't."

How to frame DealerCheck's value to a lender
Pairs WithAutoPassAutoPass catches fraud at the application level. DealerCheck catches it at the dealer relationship level.
Sold to Auto Dealerships
BorrowerCheck
Dealer-side fraud detection that prevents buybacks and strengthens lender relationships
90%
Buyback Reduction
20 sec
OTP Verify
The Problem It Solves

When a lender discovers fraud on a funded loan, they can force the dealer to buy the loan back. BorrowerCheck catches fraud at the point of sale -- before the application is ever submitted to a lender.

Key Features
  • Identity, income, and employer risk in one report
  • OFAC and MLA compliance built in
  • SMS OTP replaces KBA (20 seconds vs. 5-15 minutes)
  • Integrated into RouteOne -- 14,000+ dealerships
Who Buys This -- Important

BorrowerCheck is sold to dealers, not lenders. This is the only product in the portfolio where the dealer is the customer. When working with lenders, you can encourage them to promote BorrowerCheck to their dealer network -- but the direct sales relationship is dealer-to-Point Predictive.

"Every buyback costs a dealer thousands and damages their relationship with a lender. BorrowerCheck catches the fraud before the loan ever leaves the lot."

How to frame BorrowerCheck's value to a dealer
Related ToDealerCheckBorrowerCheck is for dealers. DealerCheck is for lenders. Different buyers, complementary signals.
Section 3

ICP & Personas

Target the right accounts and the right people. Understanding who we sell to -- and who inside each institution actually buys -- is the difference between a fast deal and a stalled one.

Ideal Customer Profile

Three customer segments. Know the differences -- deal size, cycle length, and entry point vary significantly across each.

🏦

Banks

Large regional and national banks with significant auto or consumer lending portfolios. Complex buying processes with multiple stakeholders and longer approval cycles.

  • $500M+ in assets
  • Established fraud teams with defined processes
  • Board-level ROI justification required
  • Sales cycle: 9–18 months
  • Entry point: CRO, Head of Fraud, or CLO
🤝

Credit Unions

Community-focused lenders with heavy indirect auto lending. Member trust is paramount -- fraud that reaches members is a mission problem, not just a financial one.

  • $500M+ in assets
  • Board approval required, quarterly meeting cycles
  • Sales cycle: 4–9 months
  • Entry point: CLO, VP Lending, or Head of Fraud
  • CEO entry is rare but possible at smaller CUs
🚗

Captives & Independent Auto Finance

Captive finance companies (Toyota, GM, Honda) and large independent auto finance companies (Westlake, CAC, etc.). Extremely long sales cycles but large deal sizes and high strategic value.

  • Large indirect auto portfolios, dealer-heavy
  • Highly centralized decision-making
  • Dealer fraud and synthetic ID are primary concerns
  • Sales cycle: 12–18+ months
  • Entry point: VP of Risk, Head of Fraud, Operations, or Lending team
🏪

Dealerships

Auto dealerships and dealer groups looking to protect themselves from buybacks and strengthen their lender relationships. This is the primary customer for BorrowerCheck -- the dealer is the buyer, not the lender.

  • Any size dealership or dealer group
  • Pain is buybacks and identity fraud at point of sale
  • Sales cycle: weeks to months
  • Entry point: Owner, GM, F&I Director, or Compliance
  • Primary product: BorrowerCheck

Fintech

Digital-first personal loan and auto lenders. Fast-moving, technically sophisticated buyers who prioritize growth and automation. Risk management is often secondary until scale forces the issue.

  • High application volume, rapid scale
  • Technical buyers -- API-first integration expectations
  • Growth-focused over risk-focused early stage
  • Sales cycle: 3–9 months
  • Entry point: Head of Risk, CPO, CTO, or Fraud team

Key Personas

Know what each persona cares about before you walk in. The same product story lands very differently depending on who's in the room.

Role Type:
Decision Maker
Influencer
Champion Candidate
Blocker
Budget Gatekeeper
🏆
Chief Lending Officer (CLO)
Owns loan growth, portfolio performance, and member/customer experience
Decision Maker
What They Care About
  • Loan volume growth and market share
  • Approval rates and pull-through
  • Member/customer experience (friction = lost loans)
  • Portfolio quality and performance
  • Competitive advantage in their market
Their Language

They talk in volume, growth, and pull-through. "We need to approve more without taking on more risk." "Our dealers are choosing other lenders because we're too slow." They care about saying yes safely, not just saying no to bad loans.

Pain Points That Open the Door
  • Declining capture rate or dealer satisfaction
  • High stipulation rates slowing down funding
  • Growing EPD eating into portfolio performance
  • Pressure from the board to grow safely
What to Lead With

Lead with loan growth and pull-through improvement, not fraud prevention. Frame Point Predictive as the tool that lets them say yes more confidently. Fraud reduction is the means; safe loan growth is the outcome they care about.

🛡️
Chief Risk Officer (CRO)
Owns fraud loss reduction, compliance, and portfolio quality
Decision Maker
What They Care About
  • Fraud loss reduction -- dollars and basis points
  • Portfolio quality and delinquency trends
  • Regulatory compliance and audit readiness
  • False positive rates (over-declining good borrowers)
  • Data security and vendor risk management
Their Language

They talk in fraud losses, fraud rates, and charge-offs -- not EPD. Most CROs are not connecting their early payment defaults to fraud. That connection is our job to make. When you hear "our fraud losses are manageable" or "we have fraud under control," that's your opening -- because they're almost certainly not accounting for what's hiding in their credit losses.

Pain Points That Open the Door
  • Rising EPD rates they can't explain with credit data
  • Fraud patterns that seem to shift faster than their models adapt
  • No cross-lender visibility into fraud rings
  • Heavy manual review burden on their team
What to Lead With

Lead with the EPD insight -- most fraud is hiding in their credit losses. The data study offer is perfectly calibrated for a CRO: low commitment, high insight. Get them to see their actual fraud exposure before pitching any product.

📋
SVP / VP Consumer Lending
Owns day-to-day lending operations, approval rates, and dealer relationships
Decision Maker / Influencer
What They Care About
  • Operational efficiency and automation rates
  • Speed to decision and funding
  • Dealer satisfaction and relationship quality
  • Reducing manual review burden on their team
  • Hitting monthly volume targets
Their Role in the Deal

Can be a decision maker or a strong influencer depending on the institution's structure. They feel the daily pain of stipulations, slow approvals, and dealer complaints most acutely. If you help them articulate the operational case, they often become a powerful internal advocate who can drive a deal forward even when the CRO is slower to engage.

Pain Points That Open the Door
  • "Our dealers are routing deals away from us because we're too slow or too stip-heavy"
  • "Our team spends too much time on manual review"
  • "Our capture rate on approved loans keeps slipping"
What to Lead With

Lead with operational efficiency and capture rate improvement. Show them the stip-reduction angle -- Point Predictive can clear 60-70% of approved loans automatically, freeing their team to focus on the high-risk segment.

🔍
Head of Fraud / Financial Crimes
The fraud domain expert -- technically deep, highly credible internal advocate
Champion Candidate
What They Care About
  • Detection accuracy -- catching more without over-declining
  • Keeping up with evolving fraud patterns
  • Investigator workload and efficiency
  • Data quality and model transparency
  • Building credibility with leadership on fraud ROI
Why They're Your Best Champion

This person already speaks your language. They understand the difference between identity fraud and application fraud. They feel the pain of fraud patterns that outpace their models. If you can show them data they haven't seen before, they become your internal salesperson.

Pain Points That Open the Door
  • Fraud patterns shifting faster than their models adapt
  • No visibility into what other lenders are seeing
  • Leadership doesn't understand the full scope of fraud losses
  • Limited resources to investigate every alert
How to Equip Them

Give them data they can take upstairs. The data study output is perfect -- it shows their leadership the fraud hiding in credit losses in their own portfolio. Arm them with that insight and they'll close the deal for you internally.

🚘
Head of Indirect / Auto Lending
Owns dealer relationships, indirect channel performance, and funding efficiency
Champion Candidate
What They Care About
  • Dealer satisfaction and relationship retention
  • Capture rate on approved indirect loans
  • Speed of decision and funding
  • Quality of paper coming from their dealer network
  • Avoiding adverse selection from risky dealers
Their Role in the Deal

Strong champion candidate, especially for AutoPass and DealerCheck. They feel the direct pain of fraud coming through the dealer channel and have the clearest visibility into EPD patterns by dealer. Winning their support usually means winning the deal.

Pain Points That Open the Door
  • Certain dealers have high EPD rates they can't fully explain
  • Concerned about adverse selection from their dealer network
  • Losing deals to competitors who respond faster with fewer stips
What to Lead With

Lead with the DealerCheck angle -- show them how their dealer portfolio benchmarks against the consortium. If they have risky dealers they haven't identified yet, this is the fastest path to a "how do I get this?" response.

💼
CFO
Budget gatekeeper -- approves spend, needs ironclad ROI justification
Budget Gatekeeper
What They Care About
  • Payback period and ROI -- in months, not years
  • Budget impact and total cost of ownership
  • Risk of the investment (not just the risk being solved)
  • Benchmarks -- what are comparable institutions spending?
What They Don't Want to Hear

Fraud jargon, technical product details, or feature lists. They want one number: what does this cost vs. what does it save? The data study does most of this work for you -- if you've already quantified their EPD exposure, the CFO conversation is a math problem, not a sales conversation.

How to Prepare for a CFO Conversation

By the time you're in front of a CFO, you should have a completed data study in hand. You don't need to estimate their charge-off exposure or apply assumptions -- the data study gives you the hard numbers showing exactly how much fraud was present in their portfolio and precisely how Point Predictive would have impacted it.

The CFO conversation is about making sure they understand how the business case was built and how ROI was calculated. Walk them through the methodology clearly: here's what we analyzed, here's what we found, here's the reduction rate our customers see, here's the cost vs. the return. Keep it clean and let the numbers do the work.

🔒
CISO / Information Security
The #1 deal blocker -- get them involved early or they'll kill the deal late
Blocker
Why They Block Deals

The CISO's job is to say no until proven otherwise. A new vendor with data-sharing implications is a threat until they've reviewed security documentation, completed a vendor assessment, and satisfied their internal InfoSec requirements. This process can take 3-6 months if you don't get ahead of it.

What Addresses Their Concerns
  • SOC 2 Type II certification (Point Predictive has this)
  • No PII shared -- anonymized data model only
  • No security incidents in company history
  • Security questionnaire completion
  • Data flow diagrams and API documentation
  • Reference from a similar institution who passed their review
How to Handle Them

The single most important tactic: involve them early. Don't wait for the CISO to show up at the end of a deal and restart the clock. As soon as you have a serious prospect, ask who needs to be involved in security review and offer to connect them with Point Predictive's security team directly. Proactive engagement turns a 6-month blocker into a 6-week parallel workstream.

Section 4

Competitive Positioning

Most competitive conversations aren't about winning a head-to-head fight -- they're about framing the right problem. Understand the master frame first, then use each card for the specific competitor.

The Master Frame -- Use This For Almost Every Competitor
Most tools verify WHO someone is.
Point Predictive verifies what they're telling you is true.
What Most Competitors Do

Identity verification -- confirming the person is who they say they are. Important, but only addresses 20-30% of actual fraud losses.

Credit decisioning -- predicting whether someone will repay. A completely different problem from fraud detection.

What Point Predictive Does

Application fraud detection -- catching when a real, verified person lies about income, employer, intent, or who the loan is actually for. This is the 70-80% that identity tools miss entirely.

Consortium intelligence -- seeing patterns across 650+ lenders that no single institution can detect on their own.

"90% of borrowers are honest. We help you identify the 10% who lie -- and most of them pass every identity check you already have."

Our Stance:
Complementary
Replacement
Depends on product / scope
Zest AI
AI credit underwriting platform that added fraud as a feature in August 2024
Credit & UnderwritingFraud
Depends on Product
What They Do

AI-powered credit underwriting with custom machine learning models per lender. Fraud detection (Zest Protect) launched August 2024 -- a credit team that relabeled early default prediction as fraud detection. ~300 lender customers including SchoolsFirst FCU, VyStar CU, and Citi.

Complementary or Competitive?

On credit underwriting: Complementary. Zest for credit decisions, Point Predictive for fraud detection.

On fraud detection: Direct competitors. Zest Protect and AutoPass compete for the same budget and use case.

Their Consortium Claims

Zest is telling lenders they're building a consortium -- but they're cagey about contributors, data being retained, and how fraud tags are derived. Current intelligence suggests approximately 3 contributing lenders. Point Predictive has 650+ with 10+ years of fraud-tagged loan performance data.

The Pricing Tactic -- Know This Cold

Zest is currently giving away Zest Protect at no additional cost to lenders who use or sign up for their credit model. A deliberate strategy to lock Point Predictive out of accounts. When you lose on price to Zest, you're not losing on value -- they're subsidizing fraud to protect credit model revenue.

Key Differentiators
  • Their consortium has ~3 contributors, less than 1 year old. Ours has 650+ over 10+ years
  • Custom models overfit and degrade 15-20% in production. Our LSTM common model improves across the consortium
  • Not FCRA-compliant for adverse action. AutoPass is the only FCRA-compliant deep learning fraud model
  • No income inflation detection, no fake employers, no cross-lender first-party fraud
Questions to Ask
  • "How many lenders are contributing to their consortium today?"
  • "Is Zest Protect FCRA-compliant for adverse action decisions?"
  • "What happens to Zest Protect pricing if you ever move off their credit model?"
When a Prospect Says Zest Protect Is Free

"That's a common offer right now -- they're giving away Zest Protect to protect their credit model revenue. The question is whether a free product with roughly 3 consortium contributors and less than a year of data is actually solving your fraud problem. AutoPass has 650+ contributors, 307M scored applications, 10+ years of data, and is the only FCRA-compliant fraud score in the market. Free is a compelling price. But what does it cost you when the fraud it misses goes undetected?"

Watch Out For
  • Never dismiss Zest's credit capabilities -- attack Zest Protect specifically, not their whole company
  • The free pricing tactic is hard to counter on cost alone -- always redirect to data quality and consortium depth
  • If a lender is bundled into Zest Protect for free, a data study is often the best path in
LexisNexis
Global identity verification and analytics platform serving 93% of Fortune 100
Identity & Fraud
Depends on Scope
What They Do

Identity verification using 3.3B+ anonymized user identities. Strong at detecting identity theft and synthetics through public records. Not FCRA-compliant -- cannot be used for adverse action or credit eligibility decisions.

Complementary or Competitive?

In general: Complementary. They verify who the person is. We verify what they're telling you. Different layers.

In identity-focused RFPs: Direct competitors. When a lender scopes their evaluation around identity fraud, we're in the same conversation. The key is expanding the frame.

Key Differentiators
  • Not FCRA-compliant -- cannot drive adverse action. AutoPass is the only FCRA-compliant fraud score
  • No first-party fraud detection: income inflation, fake employers, straw purchases are invisible to them
  • No lending consortium -- data from public records, not fraud-tagged loan performance
  • Identity fraud is only 15-18% of total exposure. They solve for that slice. We solve for all of it
Winning in a Shared RFP

The most important thing: reframe the problem. If the RFP is scoped around identity fraud, escalate to the right stakeholder and walk them through EPD data. Once the problem is framed as "application fraud" rather than "identity fraud," the evaluation criteria changes in our favor.

When a Prospect Already Uses LexisNexis

"Keep it -- it's a strong identity tool. LexisNexis verifies who the person is. We verify what they're telling you. A borrower can pass every LexisNexis check and still lie about their income, use a fake employer, or be a straw buyer. That's the fraud we catch after identity is verified."

Watch Out For
  • Deeply embedded at most large lenders -- never position as a replacement in an existing account
  • If the RFP is scoped around identity, escalate quickly before evaluation criteria are set in stone
SentiLink
Best-in-class synthetic identity detection with recent FedRAMP authorization
Identity & Fraud
Depends on Scope
What They Do

Narrow-focus synthetic identity detection. Genuinely excellent at this specific problem. Recently received FedRAMP authorization -- growing government/public sector focus. Point Predictive has mutual customers who run both solutions.

Complementary or Competitive?

In general: Complementary. SentiLink for synthetic IDs, Point Predictive for comprehensive fraud. Many lenders run both.

In identity-focused RFPs: Direct competitors. When a lender scopes the evaluation around synthetic identity, we're competing for the same budget.

Key Differentiators
  • Point Predictive maintains the largest negative file of known synthetics in lending -- flagged daily for consortium members
  • Synthetic + credit washing = 24% of auto fraud. Income misrepresentation alone = 45%. SentiLink only addresses the 24%
  • No income fraud detection, no fake employers, no dealer fraud, no first-party fraud of any kind
  • We cover synthetic detection AND everything they miss
Winning in a Shared RFP

Push for a data study that includes income and employment fraud signals. SentiLink has no signal there. That gap becomes undeniable fast. Also lead with the mutual customer story -- many lenders use both, which means adding Point Predictive is an expansion, not a replacement.

When a Prospect Uses SentiLink

"SentiLink is best-in-class for synthetic identities -- if you're using them, keep them. But synthetic fraud is only part of the problem. Income and employment misrepresentation is 45% of auto fraud exposure. Straw purchases, dealer fraud, bust-out schemes -- SentiLink doesn't touch those. We cover all of it, including synthetic. Many lenders run both."

Watch Out For
  • Well-respected -- acknowledge their synthetic detection strength before pivoting to coverage gaps
  • The mutual customer story is a strength, not a weakness. Lead with it
InformedIQ
AI-powered document verification and OCR for post-approval processing
Document VerificationIncome Verification
Depends on Scope
What They Do

OCR-based document intelligence. Verifies that income documents (paystubs, bank statements) are authentic and not altered. Operates post-approval when documents come in-house. 7 of the top 10 auto lenders are customers. GLBA-compliant only -- cannot be used for adverse action.

Complementary or Competitive?

In an income verification waterfall: Complementary. Point Predictive runs first at the top of the funnel -- low cost, low friction. Applications we can't clear fall to the next tier, which may include InformedIQ for document verification.

In income-focused RFPs: Direct competitors. When a lender is evaluating income verification solutions, we're competing for the same budget and workflow position. The key is establishing the waterfall frame first.

Key Differentiators
  • Top of funnel vs. bottom of funnel -- we prevent fraud before documents are requested; they verify documents after approval
  • Our customers waive paystubs on 60-70% of approvals -- reducing the volume that goes to InformedIQ's queue
  • We detect fake employers (16K+ identified), synthetics, straw buyers -- OCR cannot see any of this
  • AutoPass is FCRA-compliant for adverse action. InformedIQ is GLBA-only
The Income Verification Waterfall

This is one of the most powerful positioning frameworks in our arsenal. A lender should move from low-cost, low-friction at the top to high-cost, high-friction only when necessary:

  • 1st: Point Predictive (IEValidate) -- consortium-based, instant, no borrower friction
  • 2nd: TWN or Experian Verify -- database lookup for what we can't clear
  • 3rd: Credential-based (Plaid) -- borrower-permissioned, moderate friction
  • 4th: OCR (InformedIQ) -- document scan, higher friction
  • 5th: Paystubs -- manual, highest friction, slowest
When a Prospect Uses InformedIQ

"InformedIQ is great for what it does -- automating document processing. We work at a completely different stage. Point Predictive runs first at the top of the funnel and clears 60-70% of your applications without ever asking for a document. What doesn't pass us can fall to InformedIQ. That's the income verification waterfall -- you reserve expensive, high-friction steps for the applications that actually need them."

Watch Out For
  • 7 of the top 10 auto lenders use them -- don't dismiss, build the waterfall story around them
  • If you're in a shared income RFP, lead with the waterfall framework -- it positions Point Predictive as the first step rather than a head-to-head comparison
The Work Number
Equifax's employment and income verification database -- the incumbent most lenders use today
Income Verification
Depends on Scope
What They Do

Automated employment and income verification database. Employers contribute payroll data; lenders pay to look up records. FCRA-compliant. Coverage: 30-40% of applicants. Pricing: $10-20+ per verification, some reports up to $105+.

Complementary or Replacement?

In most cases: Complementary. Point Predictive runs first. Applications we can't clear fall to TWN as the next tier. This is the income verification waterfall -- we handle the majority at low cost, TWN catches what we pass down.

As a standalone income solution: Replacement. A lender using only TWN is paying too much for too little coverage with zero fraud detection. IEValidate is a clear upgrade.

The Income Verification Waterfall -- Lead With This

The waterfall is one of the most effective positioning frameworks we have. A lender should move from low-cost, low-friction tools at the top to high-cost, high-friction only when necessary. Point Predictive sits at the very top:

  • 1st -- Point Predictive (IEValidate): Consortium-based, real-time, no borrower friction. Clears 60-70% of applications instantly
  • 2nd -- TWN or Experian Verify: Database lookup for applications we can't clear. Good coverage for W-2 employees at large employers
  • 3rd -- Credential-based (Plaid): Borrower-permissioned bank data. Moderate friction, broader coverage
  • 4th -- OCR (InformedIQ): Document scan and verification. Higher friction, reserved for high-risk files
  • 5th -- Paystubs: Manual review. Highest friction, slowest, last resort

The value prop is simple: Point Predictive handles the majority cheaply and instantly. Expensive, friction-heavy steps are reserved for the small segment that actually needs them.

Key Differentiators
  • TWN covers 30-40%; IEValidate covers 100% -- we handle what TWN can't reach
  • TWN verifies employment exists; IEValidate detects misrepresentation -- different problems
  • TWN's QuickBooks integration introduced fake employers into their database
  • IEValidate has identified 16,000+ fake employers; TWN would validate those same employers as legitimate
Questions to Ask
  • "How are you handling the 60-70% of applicants TWN doesn't cover?"
  • "What does your income verification workflow look like today -- how many steps, and at what cost?"
  • "Have you mapped the friction cost of each step in your verification process?"
When a Prospect Uses The Work Number

"Keep TWN -- it works well for the employers that contribute to it. The question is what you're doing for the other 60-70% of applicants it doesn't cover. IEValidate runs first across all applications at a fraction of the cost. What we can't clear falls to TWN. You get consortium-based fraud detection at the top and TWN as a safety net -- without paying TWN rates for your entire application volume."

Watch Out For
  • TWN is deeply embedded in mortgage -- the replacement conversation is strongest in auto and personal lending
  • Lead with the waterfall, not the replacement. It's a less threatening frame and usually leads to a bigger deal
  • Don't oversell the QuickBooks fake employer issue as a scandal -- reference it as a known data quality gap
Scienaptic AI
AI-powered credit underwriting platform that launched a generic fraud feature in August 2025
Credit & UnderwritingFraud
Complementary
What They Do

AI credit underwriting and decisioning for banks, credit unions, auto lenders, and fintechs. 150+ customers with strong credit union presence. In August 2025 they launched a fraud detection feature -- similar to Zest AI's move in 2024. It is very generic and has not been meaningfully adopted in the market.

Key Differentiators
  • Their core business is credit decisioning -- fraud is an afterthought feature, not a core competency
  • Their fraud product is new, unproven, and lacks any consortium intelligence
  • They partner with SentiLink for identity fraud -- a clear signal they can't solve fraud on their own
  • Point Predictive + Scienaptic is a natural combination: they handle credit decisions, we handle fraud detection
When a Prospect Uses Scienaptic

"Scienaptic is a strong credit underwriting platform -- keep it for that. Their fraud feature launched in 2025 and is very early stage. We solve a completely different problem. Scienaptic answers 'will they repay?' We answer 'are they being honest?' You need both -- and the fact that they still partner with fraud vendors tells you they know that too."

Watch Out For
  • Their fraud feature is rarely encountered in the market -- don't over-index on it. Treat Scienaptic as a credit tool
  • If a prospect asks about their fraud feature, note it's very new and direct them to ask Scienaptic how many lenders are actively using it and what the consortium looks like
Section 5

Problem & Pain

Lead with pain, not product. A prospect who feels understood will listen. A prospect who feels pitched will stall. This section covers how to get in the door and what to listen for once you're there.

The Core Principle

The problems on this page are chronic -- every lender on your list has some version of them. What creates urgency is a trigger event that makes the pain visible and acute. Start with triggers to get in the door. Then use the core problems to deepen the conversation once you're inside.

Trigger Events

Four situations that reliably create urgency. When you spot one of these, move fast -- a triggered prospect is far more receptive than a cold one.

01
Highest Priority Trigger
Rising Charge-Offs or EPD Rates

This is our most successful outreach trigger, particularly for credit unions. When a lender's charge-off or delinquency data shows a negative trend, they are actively looking for answers. The question in their mind is "what's driving this?" -- and we know the answer better than they do.

For credit unions, NCUA call report data is publicly available and updated quarterly. Point Predictive has built tools to analyze this data and surface CUs with rising delinquency and charge-off trends. This is the single most credible cold outreach you can make -- you're showing up with their own data, not a generic pitch.

How to Use It

Pull the NCUA call report data for your target CUs. Identify ones with meaningful charge-off or 60-day delinquency rate increases over the last 2-4 quarters. Lead your outreach with that specific trend -- "I noticed your charge-off rate has increased X basis points over the last three quarters and wanted to reach out." That's not a cold call. That's a relevant business conversation.

"Your charge-off trends suggest there may be fraud patterns hiding in your credit losses that your current tools aren't surfacing. We've helped lenders in similar situations identify and stop those losses. Would it be worth 20 minutes to show you what we're seeing?"

Outreach hook for rising charge-off trigger
02
Operational Pain Trigger
Income Stips Are Killing Capture Rate

A lender that is routinely stipulating income verification on approved loans is losing deals every day. Dealers route business to the lender that funds fastest with the least friction. Every paystub request is a deal at risk.

This pain is often compounded by The Work Number: they're spending $10-20+ per hit on a tool that only covers 30-40% of their applicants, and still issuing stips for the rest. They're paying a lot for partial coverage that doesn't solve the problem.

How to Surface It

Ask about their current stip rate and what percentage of their income stips result in a funded loan vs. a lost deal. Most lenders haven't done this math. Walking them through it in a first conversation creates immediate urgency -- they often don't know how much the friction is actually costing them.

"If you're stipulating income on a meaningful percentage of your approvals, you're losing deals before they ever fund. We can tell you which applicants you can safely clear without a paystub -- and it's usually 60-70% of your approved volume."

Opening angle for stip rate pain
03
Reactive Trigger
A Fraud Incident They're Still Feeling

A lender that has just been hit by a significant fraud event -- a fraud ring, a series of synthetic identities, a dealer perpetrating straw purchases -- is actively motivated to prevent the next one. The pain is fresh, the budget conversation is easier, and the internal will to change is high.

These situations often create a window of 1-3 months where decision-making accelerates. A new fraud tool that would have caught the incident becomes a very easy sell -- the business case writes itself.

How to Approach It

If you hear about or suspect a recent fraud event, lead with empathy and insight -- not a product pitch. Ask them to walk you through what happened. Then show them specifically how Point Predictive would have flagged it. That demonstration is more powerful than any case study.

"I'd like to show you what Point Predictive sees on applications like that. In most cases our consortium had signals on those borrowers or that dealer well before the loans funded. Would you be willing to share a few of those applications so we can run them through our system?"

How to turn a fraud incident into a proof of value
04
Growth Trigger
Entering or Expanding Indirect Auto

A lender moving into indirect auto lending -- or expanding their dealer network -- is about to take on a new category of risk they may not be equipped for. Dealer-perpetrated fraud, adverse selection, straw borrowers, and powerbooking are indirect-auto-specific problems that their existing fraud tools weren't built to handle.

This is a perfect time to engage because the lender is in planning mode. They're receptive to building the right infrastructure before the losses start, not after.

How to Surface It

Watch for press releases, LinkedIn announcements, or news about CUs or banks launching or expanding auto lending programs. Reach out early -- before they've built their fraud stack. The conversation is "here's what you're going to see when you start scaling indirect, and here's how to be ready for it."

"Indirect auto is a different fraud environment than direct. Dealers introduce a layer of risk your existing tools weren't built for. The lenders that scale indirect successfully are the ones who build dealer monitoring and application fraud detection in from the start."

Opening angle for indirect auto expansion

Core Problems

The seven underlying problems Point Predictive solves. Each one opens a specific product conversation. Click to expand.

Fraud Losses Are Rising AutoPass

Fraud losses have been increasing across the industry for years, driven by more sophisticated schemes, better-organized fraud rings, and the growing availability of synthetic identity kits. Lenders are feeling it in their charge-off rates even when they don't recognize it as fraud.

Discovery Questions

"Has your fraud loss rate changed meaningfully over the last 12-18 months?" / "How are you currently categorizing your early payment defaults -- as fraud or credit losses?" / "What percentage of your charge-offs do you attribute to fraud vs. credit risk?"

Opens: AutoPass. The fraud loss conversation leads directly to EPD, which leads to the data study offer. This is the most common entry point into an AutoPass sale.
Fraud Is More Sophisticated AutoPass

Fraud schemes are evolving faster than most lenders' models can adapt. Custom-built models trained on a single institution's historical data become stale quickly -- fraudsters learn to evade them. A lender operating with a static fraud model from 2021 is fighting today's fraud with yesterday's playbook.

Discovery Questions

"How often are your fraud models retrained or updated?" / "Are you seeing fraud patterns that seem to be slipping through your existing controls?" / "How do you get visibility into fraud trends happening across the industry, not just in your own portfolio?"

Opens: AutoPass and the consortium story. This is the best entry point for the LSTM common model differentiation -- our models improve across 650 institutions simultaneously, not just one lender's history.
First-Party Fraud Is Invisible AutoPass

Most lenders have invested heavily in identity verification -- and it works for the fraud they can see. But first-party fraud (income misrepresentation, fake employers, straw buyers, intent to defraud) passes every identity check and hides in credit losses until the loan defaults. There are very few tools specifically designed to catch it.

Discovery Questions

"How are you currently detecting income misrepresentation -- not just employment, but whether the income stated is accurate?" / "What percentage of your fraud losses do you think are identity theft vs. application misrepresentation?" / "When a loan defaults in the first 90 days, what does your post-mortem process look like?"

Opens: AutoPass and the EPD insight. Most lenders don't have a clear answer to these questions -- which creates the opening for the data study conversation.
Income Verification Is a Deal Killer IEValidate

Proof of income is one of the most common stipulations placed on auto loan approvals -- and one of the most expensive in terms of deals lost. In an indirect lending environment where dealers are choosing between multiple lender offers, a paystub request is often enough to route the deal elsewhere. The lender that funds fastest with the least friction wins the relationship.

Discovery Questions

"What percentage of your approved loans require a paystub or income verification before funding?" / "What's your current income verification process -- do you use TWN? What's your hit rate?" / "Have you estimated how many deals you lose because of income stip friction?"

Opens: IEValidate and the income verification waterfall. This is a pure IEValidate conversation -- framed around operational efficiency and capture rate improvement, not just fraud.
Who Actually Needs a Stip? IEValidate

Many lenders apply income stipulations broadly because they don't have a reliable way to distinguish who actually needs one. They're issuing paystub requests on applications that would have sailed through clean -- adding friction for good borrowers, damaging capture rate, and frustrating dealers, all without meaningfully improving fraud detection.

The real question isn't "should we verify income?" -- it's "which specific applications have enough risk to justify the friction?" That requires intelligence, not a blanket policy.

Discovery Questions

"Do you apply income stips uniformly, or do you have a risk-based approach for deciding who gets one?" / "Of the income stips you issue, what percentage come back clean with no issues?" / "If you could identify with confidence which 30% of your applications actually need income verification, what would you do differently?"

Opens: IEValidate -- specifically the Modeled Income component. This is the best entry point for lenders who already use TWN but are issuing too many stips on the applications it doesn't cover.
Winning in a Competitive Market AutoPass + IEValidate

In indirect auto lending, speed and simplicity win deals. A lender that can return a clean approval faster and with fewer conditions than a competitor will capture more business from the same dealer -- without changing their credit policy at all. For many lenders, the constraint isn't risk appetite. It's operational friction.

Point Predictive enables faster, cleaner decisions by removing the manual review burden from low-risk applications. Lenders can auto-approve a higher percentage of their volume and reserve stipulations for the applications that genuinely need them.

Discovery Questions

"How does your approval and funding speed compare to your primary competitors in the dealer market?" / "What percentage of your approvals are auto-decisioned vs. require manual review?" / "Are there dealer relationships you've lost -- or are at risk of losing -- because of turnaround time or stip volume?"

Opens: AutoPass (GLBA version for auto-decision improvement) + IEValidate (stip reduction). This is the CLO and VP Lending conversation -- growth and competitive positioning, not fraud prevention.
Dealer Fraud and Network Risk DealerCheck + BorrowerCheck

Dealers are the source of the application in indirect lending -- which means a problematic dealer doesn't just cause one bad loan, they can quietly corrupt an entire portfolio segment. Powerbooking, straw purchase facilitation, coordinating with fraud rings -- these patterns are almost impossible to detect application by application. They only become visible at the dealer level, and only with cross-lender data.

Most lenders don't have a structured way to monitor their dealer network beyond informal relationships. They find out about a bad dealer after the losses have already accumulated.

Discovery Questions

"How do you currently monitor the health and risk of your dealer network?" / "Have you had dealers that seemed fine individually but generated a disproportionate share of your EPD or charge-offs?" / "Do you have visibility into how your dealers perform compared to what other lenders are seeing from those same dealers?"

Opens: DealerCheck for lenders, BorrowerCheck for dealers. The consortium benchmark angle is particularly powerful here -- showing a lender how their dealer EPD compares to the consortium average is often the first time they've seen that data.
Section 6

Value Proposition

Three outcomes every prospect cares about, one differentiator no competitor can match. Know these cold -- they are the foundation of every business conversation you'll have.

Value Prop 01
Reduce
Fraud Losses
40–60%
EPD Loss Reduction
Up to 70%
of EPDs Contain Fraud
Value Prop 02
Automate
Decisions
Up to 80%
Automated Decisioning
Reduce
Stips and Friction
Value Prop 03
Grow
Originations
Up to 30%
More Approvals
Fund More
Low-Risk Loans
01
Value Prop 1
Reduce Fraud Losses

Most lenders significantly underestimate their fraud losses because the majority never get classified as fraud -- they show up as credit losses, charge-offs, and early payment defaults. Point Predictive exposes that hidden exposure and stops it at the application.

What It Means

Customers reduce fraud-driven EPD losses by 40-60% on average. Up to 70% of early payment defaults contain fraud or misrepresentation signals that were present at origination -- they just weren't caught. Point Predictive catches them before the loan funds.

How to Say It

"Most of your fraud isn't being categorized as fraud -- it's hiding in your charge-off data. We've run data studies for hundreds of lenders and the average institution has 3-5x more fraud exposure than they realize. The question isn't whether you have a fraud problem. It's whether you know the size of it."

Persona Connection

CRO: Lead with the EPD-fraud link and the data study offer. CFO: Quantify the dollar exposure from the data study, then apply 40-60% reduction rate to get the savings figure. CLO: Frame as protecting the portfolio quality that enables continued growth.

02
Value Prop 2
Automate Decisions

Manual review is expensive, slow, and a competitive liability in indirect auto lending. Point Predictive gives lenders a confident risk signal that allows them to auto-approve low-risk applications and reserve manual review -- and income stipulations -- for the files that actually warrant them.

What It Means

Lenders using AutoPass can auto-decision up to 80% of applications. IEValidate allows lenders to safely waive income stips on 60-70% of approvals -- clearing good borrowers instantly while reserving verification only for high-risk files.

How to Say It

"Right now you're asking a human to review loans that a risk signal could clear in milliseconds. Every one of those reviews costs time, money, and -- in indirect lending -- a deal that might have gone somewhere else. We give you the confidence to auto-approve the clean files and focus your team on the ones that actually need attention."

Persona Connection

VP Consumer Lending: This is their problem -- manual review burden, stip friction, slow funding. Lead here. CLO: Frame as operational efficiency that directly improves capture rate. Head of Underwriting/Ops: Reduces team workload without increasing risk.

03
Value Prop 3
Grow Originations

Growth and risk management are not opposites -- the right fraud intelligence makes both possible simultaneously. Point Predictive helps lenders confidently approve more of the right loans, fund faster with less friction, and compete more effectively for dealer business. The lenders that grow most aggressively are often the ones with the best fraud intelligence.

What It Means

By clearing low-risk applications faster and reducing friction, lenders capture more of the deals they approve. Faster decisions and fewer stips mean dealers route more business their way. Lenders using Point Predictive have seen up to 30% more approvals by confidently expanding into the risk they were previously declining out of caution.

How to Say It

"We help lenders grow their portfolio without taking on more risk -- because most of the growth opportunity is in the loans they're currently declining or losing to friction. When you can identify good borrowers with confidence, you stop turning them away. When you respond faster with fewer conditions, dealers bring you more deals."

Persona Connection

CLO: This is their primary goal -- safe growth. Lead here in every CLO conversation. CEO/Board: The strategic case -- fraud intelligence as a competitive advantage, not just a cost control. VP Consumer Lending: Improved capture rate and dealer relationship quality.

The Differentiator That Enables All Three

Why the Consortium Is the Value Prop Behind the Value Prop
Any vendor can build a model.
Only Point Predictive has a decade of consortium intelligence.
Without the Consortium

A lender's fraud model is only as good as their own fraud history. Fraud patterns they haven't seen before go undetected. Fraud rings that haven't hit them yet are invisible. Their models are always one step behind.

No single institution sees enough volume to detect coordinated cross-lender schemes, emerging synthetic identity patterns, or dealer networks operating across multiple lenders simultaneously.

With Point Predictive

Every lender in the consortium benefits from the collective intelligence of 650+ institutions. Fraud patterns identified at one lender are immediately available to protect all others. A borrower flagged in California protects a lender in Ohio.

The consortium is also the only way to see cross-lender behavior -- the same borrower applying at 8 dealers, the same fake employer appearing across multiple states, the bust-out ring spreading across 12 lenders simultaneously.

"Fraud rings count on lenders not talking to each other. Our consortium is how 650 lenders talk to each other -- without sharing anything they shouldn't."

🔬
Proving the Value Prop
The Data Study Is How You Make It Real

The value props above are industry averages. A data study turns them into this lender's numbers. Point Predictive analyzes the prospect's actual portfolio and shows them exactly how much fraud was present in their EPD, which specific applications would have been flagged, and what the dollar impact would have been.

This is the single most powerful sales tool available. A prospect who has seen their own data doesn't need to be convinced -- the business case builds itself. Offer it early and often. It is low-commitment for them and high-impact for you.

Section 7

Sales Playbook

How deals move from first contact to closed. Know the stages, know what MEDDPICC means at each one, and know what questions to ask to qualify fast and advance confidently.

Stage 1
Discovery
Stage 2
Qualified
Stage 3
POV
Stage 4
Use Case / Benefits
Stage 5
Negotiations
Stage 6
Contracting
Stage 7
Closed

MEDDPICC

The qualification framework used to move deals from Discovery to Qualified. You don't need every box filled -- but you need to be actively working every element to run a tight deal.

M Metrics

The quantifiable business impact Point Predictive delivers for this specific prospect. Vague value props don't close deals -- specific numbers do. Metrics should be anchored to the prospect's own data wherever possible.

What to Capture

Annual charge-off dollars, EPD rate, monthly application volume, stip rate, current income verification cost, capture rate. The data study turns these into precise ROI figures.

E Economic Buyer

The person who controls the budget and can make the final purchase decision. This is not always the person you're talking to. At banks and CUs it's typically the CLO, CRO, or CFO depending on how the deal is scoped. You need a clear path to this person before a deal can advance.

Red Flag: If you've been in a deal for 60+ days and haven't met or had a clear plan to reach the economic buyer, the deal is at risk regardless of how well discovery is going.
D Decision Criteria

The specific criteria the prospect will use to evaluate and choose a solution. Understanding this shapes how you present and what you emphasize. Common criteria: FCRA compliance for adverse action, integration complexity, data security certifications, coverage rates, cost per application, consortium size.

How to Surface It

"If you were evaluating two solutions side by side, what would be the most important factors in your decision?"

D Decision Process

The steps required to make a purchase decision at this institution. Who needs to approve? Does it require board sign-off? Does it go through procurement? Is there a security review? Understanding the full process early prevents late-stage surprises that reset timelines.

How to Surface It

"Walk me through how a decision like this typically gets made here -- who else would need to be involved, and what does the approval process look like?"

P Paper Process

The legal and procurement process for getting a contract executed. Larger institutions often have lengthy legal review, standard contract redlines, and procurement requirements that add weeks or months. Knowing this early allows you to plan the close timeline accurately and avoid surprises at Contracting.

How to Surface It

"Once we reach agreement on terms, what does the contract process look like on your end? Do you have a standard procurement or legal review process we should plan for?"

I Identify Pain

The specific, quantified pain this prospect is experiencing that Point Predictive solves. "They want to reduce fraud" is not identified pain. "Their charge-off rate has increased 40 basis points over the last 3 quarters and their CRO attributed it to EPD they can't explain" is identified pain. Be specific.

Key: Pain that is specific, quantified, and acknowledged by the prospect themselves advances deals. Pain you assume they have does not.
C Champion

An internal advocate who believes in Point Predictive's value and will actively sell on your behalf when you're not in the room. A champion is not the same as a contact. They need to have organizational credibility, access to the economic buyer, and genuine conviction that this solves their problem.

Signs of a Real Champion

They proactively share information about internal dynamics. They introduce you to other stakeholders. They ask how they can help move things forward. They tell you what happened in meetings you weren't in.

No champion = no deal. If you don't have a champion, finding one is your first priority.
C Competition

Who else is being evaluated and what is their current solution. Understanding the competitive landscape early shapes how you position and what objections to get ahead of. Don't wait for competition to surface -- ask about it directly.

How to Surface It

"Are you looking at any other solutions as part of this evaluation?" and "What are you currently using for fraud detection today -- what's working and what isn't?"

Discovery Question Bank

Organized by topic. You won't use all of these in a single call -- pick the ones most relevant to who you're talking to and what you're trying to learn.

Portfolio & Performance
  • "What does your auto lending portfolio look like -- primarily indirect, direct, or a mix?"
  • "How has your charge-off rate trended over the last 4-6 quarters?"
  • "What's your current early payment default rate -- and how are you categorizing those losses?"
  • "Roughly what's your monthly application volume for auto?"
  • "What's your approval rate and capture rate today?"
  • "Are there segments of your portfolio where EPD or charge-offs are disproportionately high?"
Fraud & Risk
  • "How do you currently define and measure fraud losses -- what makes it into your fraud bucket vs. your credit loss bucket?"
  • "What fraud types are you seeing most frequently right now?"
  • "What tools are you currently using for fraud detection -- and which fraud types do they cover?"
  • "Have you seen an increase in synthetic identity or income misrepresentation over the last 12-18 months?"
  • "How much visibility do you have into fraud patterns happening at other institutions -- are you seeing the industry picture, or just your own?"
  • "When a loan goes EPD, what does your post-mortem process look like?"
Income Verification
  • "Walk me through your current income verification process -- what tools are you using and in what order?"
  • "What's your current stip rate on income verification -- what percentage of approvals require proof of income before funding?"
  • "If you use The Work Number, what's your hit rate? What happens to the applications it doesn't cover?"
  • "Have you estimated how many deals you lose because borrowers don't complete the income verification process?"
  • "Do you apply income stips uniformly, or do you have a risk-based criteria for who gets one?"
  • "What's your total annual spend on income verification today across all tools?"
Dealer Network & Indirect Lending
  • "How large is your dealer network and how actively do you monitor dealer performance?"
  • "Have you had situations where a dealer that seemed fine individually generated a disproportionate share of your EPD or charge-offs?"
  • "Do you have visibility into how your dealers perform compared to what other lenders are seeing from those same dealers?"
  • "Have you experienced dealer buybacks recently? What triggered them?"
  • "How does your capture rate compare across different dealers -- are there patterns you can't fully explain?"
Operations & Technology
  • "What loan origination system are you using?"
  • "What percentage of your applications are auto-decisioned today vs. going to manual review?"
  • "What does your manual review team look like -- how many people, and what's their primary workload?"
  • "Have you integrated any fraud or risk APIs into your origination workflow before? What was that process like?"
Decision & Process
  • "What's driving your interest in looking at this now -- is there a specific event or business priority behind it?"
  • "Who else would need to be involved in an evaluation like this?"
  • "What does your decision-making process typically look like for a vendor relationship at this level?"
  • "Do you have a timeline in mind -- is there a quarter or budget cycle this needs to align with?"
  • "Are you looking at any other solutions as part of this evaluation?"
  • "What would success look like for you at the end of this process?"
Section 8

ROI & Business Case

The business case is what converts a convinced prospect into a signed contract. Know how it's built, what the hard numbers are, and where you'll face pushback before you're in the room.

Primary Path
Retrospective Data Study

Two years of the prospect's actual loan data scored retrospectively. The business case is built entirely from their numbers -- no assumptions required. This is the strongest version of the business case.

Alternative Path
Benchmark ROI Model

When a retro isn't done, the ROI tool uses industry benchmarks and the prospect's portfolio inputs to estimate benefits. Numbers are less precise but still compelling. Used at Qualified stage for ballpark/strawman pricing.

The Retrospective Data Study

🔬
What It Is
Retrospective Scoring of 2 Years of Loan Data

The data study scores approximately two years of the prospect's historical applications retrospectively -- meaning we score each loan as we would have scored it at the time, based only on the data that was available at origination. This prevents hindsight bias and gives the prospect a true picture of what Point Predictive would have flagged before the loan ever funded.

Step 1 -- Data In

Prospect provides 2 years of application and loan performance data. The SE team handles the technical receipt and preparation.

Step 2 -- Analysis

Point Predictive scores all applications through the consortium models. An SE analyzes the results -- identifying which loans were flagged, which fraud types were present, and what patterns emerged.

Step 3 -- Deliverable

A comprehensive presentation covering findings, product recommendations, and anticipated benefits with full ROI calculation. All underlying data is returned to the prospect so they can analyze and stress test the numbers themselves.

Your Role as the Seller

You don't run the data study -- your SE does. Your job is to set it up correctly (right stakeholders, right data, right expectations on timeline) and stay close to the champion throughout. The data study presentation is typically your most important meeting in the deal cycle. Make sure the right decision-makers are in the room when results are delivered.

The ROI Calculation

Hard Benefit -- Defend This in Negotiations
Fraud Loss Reduction

The most defensible number in the business case. The retro identifies which of the prospect's actual EPD loans had fraud signals at origination -- and the dollar value of those loans represents their addressable fraud exposure. Apply our customer average reduction rate (40-60%) to get the annual savings figure.

The Math
  • Retro identifies EPD loans with fraud signals present at origination
  • Dollar value of those loans = fraud exposure
  • Apply 40-60% reduction rate = annual fraud savings
  • Compare to annual contract cost = ROI and payback period
Why It's Defensible

These are the prospect's own loans, their own defaults, their own data. The fraud signals were present at origination and the loan defaulted -- the causal link is visible in their portfolio. This is not an assumption. This is evidence.

~
Soft Benefit -- Expect Pushback in Negotiations
Automation & Funding Uplift

The automation benefits -- reduced stip rates, faster decisioning, improved capture rate -- are real and meaningful, but they are directional estimates rather than hard numbers. When we say a lender "could have funded a loan" that friction caused them to lose, we cannot be certain. Prospects know this and will push back on it during negotiations.

What Gets Calculated
  • Stip reduction rate applied to approved volume
  • Estimated pull-through improvement on cleared applications
  • Manual review cost savings based on auto-decision rate improvement
  • Income verification cost savings (vs. TWN or paystub process)
How to Handle the Pushback

Be honest about the distinction. Automation benefits are assumptions applied to real data -- they represent opportunity, not certainty. Don't over-defend them. Instead, anchor the conversation back to the fraud loss reduction number, which is hard. The automation benefits are upside -- the fraud savings alone often justify the investment.

Know This Before Negotiations

Automation benefits typically get cut substantially during pricing negotiations. This is expected and normal -- don't be surprised by it. Build your business case with both, present both honestly, and be prepared to anchor on fraud savings when the automation numbers get challenged.

Pricing Conversations

The Reality

Point Predictive is expensive -- and we know it. The value is there, but the price is real and prospects will push back. Know the common objections before they come up so you're not caught off guard.

The Per-App Math Problem

The most common pricing objection for AutoPass. Lenders take our annual flat fee, divide it by their monthly application volume, and arrive at a per-application cost -- then compare it to what they pay for bureau products on a per-hit basis.

At that math, we are often as expensive as a credit bureau. This creates sticker shock even when the ROI is strong.

How to Handle It

"The per-app comparison isn't quite the right frame -- bureaus charge per hit on a narrow problem. Point Predictive covers income fraud, employment fraud, synthetic identities, dealer fraud, and straw purchases in a single score. The right comparison is what it would cost to replicate that coverage across multiple point solutions. But more importantly, let's look at what the retro showed -- the ROI from fraud savings alone is [X]. At that return, the cost-per-app conversation is secondary."

The move: Redirect from cost-per-app to ROI-per-dollar. The fraud savings number is what matters, not the per-application cost in isolation.
Challenging the Automation Benefits

Prospects will push back on the funding uplift and capture rate improvement numbers in the business case -- usually with "we can't be sure we would have funded those loans" or "that assumes a lot about borrower behavior." They're not wrong. These are assumptions.

How to Handle It

"You're right that the automation benefits involve assumptions -- we can't guarantee every cleared application would have funded. That's why we separate hard benefits from directional benefits in the business case. The fraud savings number comes directly from your own loan data and is not an assumption. Even if we strip out the automation benefits entirely, the fraud savings alone show [X] return at your contract cost. The automation upside is real, but it's not what we're asking you to bet on."

The move: Concede the soft benefits gracefully and anchor hard on fraud savings. Giving ground on assumptions while defending evidence is a stronger negotiating posture than defending everything equally.
The ROI Tool

Point Predictive has an internal ROI tool for early-stage pricing conversations. It uses the prospect's portfolio inputs combined with benchmark assumptions to generate a ballpark business case and strawman pricing -- useful at the Qualified stage before a retro is complete.

Important: The ROI tool is a Qualified-stage tool for directional conversations, not a substitute for the data study. It does not yet generate final pricing -- use it to establish the value frame early, then replace it with retro numbers once the data study is complete.
Section 9

Field Readiness

The practical knowledge you need to operate in the field — your sales tools, LOS integrations, partnerships, internal contacts, and industry resources to stay sharp.

Your Sales Tools

Four internal tools purpose-built for your pipeline. Know what each one does, when to reach for it, and how to get results out of it fast.

Deal stage: Discovery Qualified POV
CU Value Calculator
CU Value Calculator
Model the fraud exposure and Point Predictive value for any credit union — in seconds.
Discovery Qualified

Search any credit union by name and the calculator auto-populates their auto lending volume and fraud exposure estimates directly from their latest call report data. No manual inputs required. Use it to quickly assess whether a CU has a problem worth solving — and to put real numbers in your outreach that get responses.

How to Use It
  1. 1
    Search for the credit union
    Open the CU Value Calculator from your Sales workstation and type the credit union's name. Select the right institution from the results.
  2. 2
    Review the auto-populated data
    The calculator pulls their latest call report data and models their auto lending volume, fraud exposure, and the projected value of a Point Predictive engagement. Nothing to fill in — it's already there.
  3. 3
    Use the output for research and outreach
    The trend data and projected value gives you a specific, data-driven reason to reach out. Reference their actual numbers — "Based on your auto lending volume, here's what we typically see…" — rather than a generic pitch.
Why This Works

Sending a prospect data about their own institution generates significantly higher response rates than cold outreach. You're leading with insight about their business, not a pitch about yours. Use the calculator output to open the conversation — not to close it.

Dealer Impact Dashboard
Dealer Impact Dashboard
Per-lender portfolio KPIs and dealer-level drill-down for IEValidate and BorrowerCheck.
Not Active Yet

When active, this dashboard will let you select any lender and see their portfolio KPIs alongside projected IEValidate and BorrowerCheck benefit projections, including a sortable dealer-level breakdown. It will be a strong tool for Discovery and Qualified conversations where a lender wants to see data specific to their book of business.

Data processing is still underway. Step-by-step instructions will be added here once the dashboard goes live. Watch for a team announcement.

ROI Requests + AutoPass ROI Calculator
The ROI Workflow
Two tools that work together to take a prospect from interest to a delivered business case.
Qualified POV

ROI Requests and the AutoPass ROI Calculator work as a two-part workflow. ROI Requests is your pipeline tracker — it shows you where each prospect is in the intake process. The AutoPass ROI Calculator turns their form responses into a strawman ROI built on estimates honed across 300+ data study retros. The output is a polished business case PDF you can put in front of a prospect at the POV stage.

Step-by-Step Workflow
1
Generate and send the intake form
Once a prospect is Qualified, generate their intake form and send it. The request appears in ROI Requests with a status of Sent.
2
Wait for the prospect to submit
When the prospect completes the form you'll receive a Slack notification. The request status in ROI Requests updates to Form Completed.
3
Open the ROI Calculator from the submission
Open the completed request in ROI Requests and click through directly to the AutoPass ROI Calculator. All of the prospect's form data auto-populates — no manual entry.
4
Export the business case PDF
Navigate to the Customer Summary tab inside the calculator and click Export PDF. This generates a fully formatted business case document ready to deliver to the prospect.
5
Update the request status
Return to ROI Requests and update the status to Pricing Delivered to keep your pipeline view accurate.
6
Deliver live on a call, then follow up with the PDF
Walk through the ROI Calculator live on the pricing call so you can narrate how you're reading their data. Then send the business case PDF by email afterward — it becomes collateral the prospect can share internally to build the case for budget and approval.
Why the Strawman Is Credible

The ROI estimates are built on inputs honed across 300+ data study retros. The projected numbers are highly accurate to what a full data study will confirm. Frame it that way — you're not giving the prospect a guess, you're giving them a preview of what the data study will show.

Lead Research
Lead Research
AI-generated intel on inbound leads before you make contact.
Discovery

When an inbound lead comes in through the website, a form, or a content download, an AI agent automatically researches the company and contact. That research lands here — company summary, fit assessment, trigger events, and a recommended next step — before you've lifted a finger.

How to Use It
  1. 1
    Check for new leads
    Open the Lead Research tool from your Sales workstation. New inbound leads appear automatically once the agent has finished their profile — no manual entry required.
  2. 2
    Read the research package
    Each lead includes a company summary, triage tier, fit assessment, and a recommended next step. Read it before you reach out — it tells you whether this lead is worth prioritizing and gives you specific hooks for your first message.
  3. 3
    Use the research in your outreach
    Reference the company context, fit tier, and suggested talking points to personalize your first touch. A message that speaks to their specific situation will always outperform a generic intro.
Note — Tool in Active Development

The Lead Research agent is still being built out. Use it as a strong research starting point and layer in your own context on top. As the agent matures, it will push updates directly into HubSpot and Salesforce, eliminating the manual data entry from your workflow.

LOS Integrations

When a prospect asks about integration, knowing their LOS lets you give a confident, specific answer rather than a vague "we integrate with most platforms."

Active Integrations
Defi Solutions
MeridianLink Consumer
MeridianLink DecisionLender
Sync1 Systems
Fuse
Provenir
GDS Link
Launcher Solutions
Inovatec
Lendsuite
In Progress
Temenos
Origence

If a prospect uses an LOS not on either list, loop in Brett Myers (Integrations & Implementation) to assess what a custom integration would involve before making any commitments on timeline.

Partnerships

Four active partnerships that create sales opportunities or strengthen product conversations.

DealerTrack
Integrated Partner

Point Predictive's strongest dealer channel partnership. BorrowerCheck is integrated directly into DealerTrack's compliance platform, and DealerTrack is actively selling us to their dealer network. This is a significant distribution advantage -- mention it when positioning BorrowerCheck with dealers or dealer groups.

RouteOne
Integrated Partner

BorrowerCheck is available in RouteOne as a premium add-on, giving access to their dealer network. RouteOne is one of the two dominant dealer financing platforms alongside DealerTrack. Useful for dealers already operating in the RouteOne environment who want to add BorrowerCheck without a separate implementation.

Open Lending
Integrated Partner

Open Lending uses IEValidate for all applications that run through their Lenders Protection program -- specifically to waive income stipulations. This is a meaningful proof point for IEValidate: a major lending enablement platform trusted it enough to embed it directly into their core product. If you're selling IEValidate to a credit union that uses Open Lending, this partnership is highly relevant context.

OttoMoto
Partner

OttoMoto operates in the automotive finance ecosystem. Ask your SE or Justin for current details on partnership scope and how to reference it in prospect conversations.

Internal Team

Who to go to and when. Knowing this early saves time and builds the right relationships from day one.

Justin Davis
SE & Product

Your go-to for all SE work and product knowledge. Data study requests, technical questions, integration scoping, demo support, and anything product-related starts here.

Scott Ellefson
Fraud Strategy

Fraud strategy, fraud intelligence, and fraud investigation questions. If a prospect needs expert-level fraud context or wants to understand what's happening in the market, Scott and the fraud team are the resource. Invaluable for complex fraud conversations with CROs and fraud teams.

Dave Johnson
Compliance & Legal

Compliance and legal questions, security review support, contract and MSA questions, FCRA/GLBA compliance inquiries from prospects. Loop Dave in early when a prospect's legal or compliance team gets involved -- don't try to answer legal questions yourself.

Josh Zamora
Customer Success

Post-sale customer health, onboarding support, and expansion opportunities. Loop Josh in at close to ensure a smooth handoff. Also a good resource when a prospect wants to speak with an existing customer -- Josh knows the customer relationships.

Brett Myers
Integrations & Implementation

Technical integration questions, implementation timelines, and LOS compatibility for platforms not on the active integration list. Bring Brett in when a prospect has a non-standard LOS or when implementation complexity becomes a deal conversation.

Darren Thomas
Data Science

Model questions, data science methodology, and technical questions about how Point Predictive's scoring models work. Useful when a technically sophisticated prospect (data team, quant risk) pushes deep on modeling approach or wants to understand the LSTM methodology.

Michael Hughes
Pricing

Formal pricing, custom quotes, and pricing approvals. Don't quote pricing to a prospect without going through Michael. The ROI tool gives ballpark figures at Qualified stage, but final pricing always runs through Michael.

Alex Vazquez
Admin

Administrative support, logistics, and internal coordination. Go-to for scheduling, internal process questions, and anything operational that doesn't fit neatly elsewhere.

Industry Resources

What to read and who to follow. Staying current on the industry makes you credible in prospect conversations and helps you spot trigger events early.

Publications
Auto Finance News

Industry publication covering auto lending, dealership finance, and captive lenders. Essential for staying current on market trends and lender news.

CU Today

Credit union industry news. Covers NCUA developments, CU strategy, and member trends. Useful for spotting trigger events in credit union accounts.

Car Dealership Guy

Newsletter and content brand focused on the dealer perspective. Good for understanding what dealers care about -- useful context for BorrowerCheck and DealerCheck conversations.

Finopotamus

Covers fintech and technology adoption in credit unions. Useful for understanding how CUs are thinking about technology and vendor relationships.

LinkedIn Voices Worth Following
Frank McKenna

Point Predictive's Chief Fraud Strategist. Prolific fraud intelligence content. Follow to stay current and to understand the fraud narrative from Point Predictive's perspective.

David Maimon

Criminology researcher and prominent voice on cybercrime, fraud, and identity theft. Publishes research and commentary on fraud trends. Worth following for academic and investigative fraud intelligence.

Car Dealership Guy

Large audience in the dealer community. Good for understanding dealer sentiment and market dynamics.

Bill Ploog

Industry voice in auto lending and financial services. Worth following for market perspective and relationship context.

Point Predictive Content
Annual Fraud Trends Reports -- the most important content to know cold. These are the source of the key stats you'll use in every conversation. Read each one when it comes out.
Blog Posts -- timely fraud intelligence and market commentary. Good for outreach hooks and staying current on what Point Predictive is publishing.
White Papers -- deeper research content on specific fraud topics. Useful as educational resources to share with prospects and as credibility builders in early-stage conversations.